Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> + } else if (atom->u.remote_ref.option == RR_REMOTE_NAME) {
>> + int explicit;
>> + const char *remote = starts_with(atom->name, "push") ?
>> + pushremote_for_branch(branch, &explicit) :
>> + remote_for_branch(branch, &explicit);
>
> I think "int explicit = 0;" is needed, as pushremote_for_branch()
> does seem to expect that the "explicit" return parameter is
> initialized by the caller.
Not really. I misread these helper functions. pushremote_for_branch()
ends up calling remote_for_branch() which does clear, so we are OK
without caller initializing it.
